He has not been signed. Agreed to terms....yes.....but officially signed? No.

Lots of tests, background checks, etc have to be done before this one is official.....and it happens more than you may think that these "agreed to terms" deals don't pan out because of a red flag when the tests etc are done.

The Hernandez signing - is that just to fill a open spot in Columbus or Akron, or is it insurance in case the Tribe makes a trade that includes Marson? I noticed he got invited to spring training. He's 33 and hit .320 in AAA and AA next year. He looks like a capable big league backup catcher to me.

One other thing with the Derek Lowe deal. He happens to be a Scott Boras client. A side effect might be grabbing his attention that the Indians are not a "developmental team" anymore. That we are willing to put (a little bit of) money where our mouth is. Just in case he has other clients looking to be in a pennant race this season.

This won't help getting Prince Fielder here. But it might help get the conversation started with an extension for Choo. A Boras client that had a bad year on and of the field in 2011. Given the Indians lack of OF talent in the system, keeping Choo for a couple of extra years could be quite valuable.

GhostofTedCox wrote:One other thing with the Derek Lowe deal. He happens to be a Scott Boras client. A side effect might be grabbing his attention that the Indians are not a "developmental team" anymore. That we are willing to put (a little bit of) money where our mouth is. Just in case he has other clients looking to be in a pennant race this season.

This won't help getting Prince Fielder here. But it might help get the conversation started with an extension for Choo. A Boras client that had a bad year on and of the field in 2011. Given the Indians lack of OF talent in the system, keeping Choo for a couple of extra years could be quite valuable.

Keeping Choo with an extension would make a lot of sense.. no bout a doubt.. but, Scott Boras doesn't give a rat's ass about perceptions.. he's ALL ABOUT THE MONEY.. that's his job and he does it well.. The Indians didn't show Boras squaaaaaaaaaadooooooshe... The Braves had already told Derek Lowe that he would NOT be in their starting rotation if they could help it.. Lowe's value to the Braves was zilch. There were MORE than thrilled to see someone/anyone take him off their roster.. Frank Wren dumping Derek Lowe & his salary is the only way the transaction can be viewed..

The Indians are now in a position to take over Cleveland in a way that has not been seen since the late 1990's. The golden age of Indians baseball began with Jacobs Field, and exploded when the Browns left town.

Unfortunately, the Browns are still here, but the Cavaliers will not be with us this season. This means people and corporations will have some extra cash to spend on sports entertainment.

The Indians, coincidentally, are trying to become true contenders in 2012. Strong offseason moves by management, and ownership, may induce people to buy more ticket packages this offseason. More tickets sold lead to a better atmosphere at the park, more revenue, and maybe more wins.

I have never commented in a thread about the responsibilities of ownership. But if there was ever a good reason and opportunity to increase payroll, this season might be it.

GhostofTedCox wrote:The Indians are now in a position to take over Cleveland in a way that has not been seen since the late 1990's. The golden age of Indians baseball began with Jacobs Field, and exploded when the Browns left town.

Unfortunately, the Browns are still here, but the Cavaliers will not be with us this season. This means people and corporations will have some extra cash to spend on sports entertainment.

The Indians, coincidentally, are trying to become true contenders in 2012. Strong offseason moves by management, and ownership, may induce people to buy more ticket packages this offseason. More tickets sold lead to a better atmosphere at the park, more revenue, and maybe more wins.

I have never commented in a thread about the responsibilities of ownership. But if there was ever a good reason and opportunity to increase payroll, this season might be it.

I agree 100%. Even though the Browns are still here, this is how many years in a row being awful? Even if the nba comes back this season, which looks unlikely, the cavs will be one of the worst teams in the league. This is a golden opportunity for the Indians to gain some of the casual Cleveland sport fan's support.

The impending cancellation of the NBA season should have a positive impact on the Indians attendance figures. The Browns are at a point where the remaining non-sell out games may not be televised as Cleveland area fans have seen the organization is proving to be "more of the same" as it relates to talent evaluation and acquisition. The media has already begun to couch their stories and reports as "fire the coach", he doesn't know what he's doing. Browns fans have seen, once the media starts down that path, there is nothing that will stop it. Upon the inevitable firing of Pat Shurmur, the next head coach that will be fired would make change number six since their return:

GeronimoSon wrote:The impending cancellation of the NBA season should have a positive impact on the Indians attendance figures. The Browns are at a point where the remaining non-sell out games may not be televised as Cleveland area fans have seen the organization is proving to be "more of the same" as it relates to talent evaluation and acquisition. The media has already begun to couch their stories and reports as "fire the coach", he doesn't know what he's doing. Browns fans have seen, once the media starts down that path, there is nothing that will stop it. Upon the inevitable firing of Pat Shurmur, the next head coach that will be fired would make change number six since their return:

Doing the same thing again and again while expecting different results is the definition of insanity..

Another hot start like the one similar to the 2011 season would create a "buzz" that should be seen at the turnstiles located at the corner of Carnegie and Ontario...

The Browns are a mess. Changing coaches doesn't work if the players are not there. Also with an impending lockout coming the team would have been better off keeping Mangini as the loss of the pre-season and OTA's really has set this team back. Changing both offense and defense schemes in this past offseason really was not that wise.

On a good note, drafting has been better in recent years (since Joe Thomas) and they have an opportunity to make the Julio Jones trade turn this franchise around.

GeronimoSon wrote:The impending cancellation of the NBA season should have a positive impact on the Indians attendance figures. The Browns are at a point where the remaining non-sell out games may not be televised as Cleveland area fans have seen the organization is proving to be "more of the same" as it relates to talent evaluation and acquisition. The media has already begun to couch their stories and reports as "fire the coach", he doesn't know what he's doing. Browns fans have seen, once the media starts down that path, there is nothing that will stop it. Upon the inevitable firing of Pat Shurmur, the next head coach that will be fired would make change number six since their return:

Doing the same thing again and again while expecting different results is the definition of insanity..

Another hot start like the one similar to the 2011 season would create a "buzz" that should be seen at the turnstiles located at the corner of Carnegie and Ontario...

The Browns are a mess. Changing coaches doesn't work if the players are not there. Also with an impending lockout coming the team would have been better off keeping Mangini as the loss of the pre-season and OTA's really has set this team back. Changing both offense and defense schemes in this past offseason really was not that wise.

On a good note, drafting has been better in recent years (since Joe Thomas) and they have an opportunity to make the Julio Jones trade turn this franchise around.

If by saying "turn this franchise around" you mean get worse.. that's more than a very distinct possibility..

GeronimoSon wrote:If by saying "turn this franchise around" you mean get worse.. that's more than a very distinct possibility..

How? On the field they've made 1 playoff appearance and have drafted in the top 10 almost continuously. As for with the fans, after '95 most of those that would jump ship already have (me, I've only got an interest in them but before '95 I was a huge fan.....no longer will I invest my heart in an NFL franchise). If they don't translate that trade into getting better than they will continue to be the Pittsburgh Pirates of the NFL.

daingean wrote:The Browns are a mess. Changing coaches doesn't work if the players are not there. Also with an impending lockout coming the team would have been better off keeping Mangini as the loss of the pre-season and OTA's really has set this team back. Changing both offense and defense schemes in this past offseason really was not that wise.

On a good note, drafting has been better in recent years (since Joe Thomas) and they have an opportunity to make the Julio Jones trade turn this franchise around.

Agree, hate the double switch-up, and while the defense has looked ok, just too much change and in the worst off-season to do it.

Not sold on their drafting (had some pretty horrible ones since Joe Thomas). Did LOVE the Julio Jones trade though (and Sheard/Little round 2). Jones is way too injury prone for a team like the Browns.

Will be interesting to see how the NBA lockout will help the Indians. Already were likely to get some help due to the Cavs stinking (most people who bought season tickets for last year did so hoping Lebron would be back). Cavs are in for a world of hurt. Tribe needs to get off to a hot start, but we've seen before when the Cavs stink that people will come out.

Prosecutor wrote:The Hernandez signing - is that just to fill a open spot in Columbus or Akron, or is it insurance in case the Tribe makes a trade that includes Marson? I noticed he got invited to spring training. He's 33 and hit .320 in AAA and AA next year. He looks like a capable big league backup catcher to me.

Typically all upper level minor league catchers are invited to spring training. Team needs catcher bodies for the first few weeks to catch the 25-30 arms in camp.

GeronimoSon wrote:The General Managers Meetings are now underway in Milwaukee.. :::::: YAWN ::::::

The biggest news to come out of the meetings for the Indians?.. probably nothing..

The GM Meetings typically never create lots of rumor fodder. A lot of the groundwork laid in July/Aug is continued and some new groundwork is started on newly available players at the GM Meetings....the shit typically hits the fan at the Winter Meetings, which is in 2 weeks.

A bit surprised by adding Diaz and Salazar, ecspecially considering Stowell and Bryson both were left unprotected. Won't be surprised to see one or both selected in the rule 5 draft but I hope against it.

homerawayfromhome wrote:A bit surprised by adding Diaz and Salazar, ecspecially considering Stowell and Bryson both were left unprotected. Won't be surprised to see one or both selected in the rule 5 draft but I hope against it.

That would suck. Really like both of them and thought they would play a role in our bullpen next year (Stowell perhaps) or in 2013 (Bryson).

homerawayfromhome wrote:A bit surprised by adding Diaz and Salazar, ecspecially considering Stowell and Bryson both were left unprotected. Won't be surprised to see one or both selected in the rule 5 draft but I hope against it.

Not too surprised on Diaz (middle infielder, good defense, could stick as a utility guy all year). Salazar though....yeah, did not see that one coming. I'd have gone Bryson personally but hopefully he, Stowell, and others make it thru.

They essentially removed Valbuena from the roster to add Diaz. Boy, if you are Luis Valbuena you must feel like garbage because you got DFAed for Juan Diaz. Folks, Diaz is not a very good prospect. Fringe MLB player, just like Valbuena. If you ask me I'd rather keep Valbuena on the roster. He is a MUCH better hitter than Diaz, and although Diaz is a better defender he is not that much better thanb Valbuena. Plus Valbuena also brings more versatility and experience. Never thought I would see the day I preferred Valbuena on the roster to another player.

As for Salazar, that is the one I don't get at all. He is very talented and a guy they have always been high on, and I know he was throwing up to 98 MPH this fall....but the guy is still a Single-A experienced pitcher and some time away. He's a guy that I don't think any team would have bothered to roster, and even if they did he wouldn't have stuck on a big league roster all year.

All that said, I am not too worried about losing anyone in Rule 5. Even if the Indians do lose a guy or two, I don't expect any of them to stick.

Actions also speak louder than words. The fact the Indians rostered Salazar over guys like Stowell and Bryson shows that Salazar has either been a grossly undervalued prospect, or that Stowell and Bryson have been overvalued. I'm in no way concerned about losing Stowell, though Bryson I think has a chance to stick with someone, though still a long shot.

Stowell is a guy I think some team may try to take a flier on bc he hits triple digits. Stowell had a bit of an odd yr missing time and innings for personal reasons and looking like 'Wild Thing' on the mound.I am concerned Rob Bryson may be selected though... Not overly concerned. Iblike him, he's a hard thrower very good stuff, has had injury troubles... But he's a guy that could be a dominate closer a few yrs down the road IMO.

Diaz value was as a young (22) at AA and SS which the Tribe values. The best I figure the Tribe feels Diaz will fill out his frame and become at least a ML as a UTL type. I've heard him compared to Alex Cora.Danny Salazar is a guy the Tribe must really feel will progress qkly. I can't say I disagree with that but I feel he could have been left off having only pitched as high as LC.

Personally I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility the Tribe trades off a few guys during the winter that clears spots and adds some needed pop to lineup. The Tribe is still loaded with bullpen options (CC Lee, Sturdevant, Burns) with or without Bryson and Stowell. I'd hate to see either go but it would be hits the system can sustain.

Not worried at all about losing Stowell. I'm not sure how much ML value he really has anymore.....sure he can throw hard, but he just does not have the command/consistency to pitch in the bigs. Could that change and evolve over time, maybe, but at his age and where he is it is hard to see it changing much. If he does get selected, I see no way he survives all year with a team on a ML roster.

Diaz is a dime a dozen infielder. Well that may be a little over the top, but are we really worried about losing a Hector Luna type in Rule 5? Who cares. A wasted roster spot.

Knowing all this, I would have rather just only rostered Barners because really he was the ONLY guy to worry about losing in Rule 5 who would stick or who had any real ML value. I also know the decision to roster Salazar and Diaz was not a unanimous decision with the front office.

They essentially removed Valbuena from the roster to add Diaz. Boy, if you are Luis Valbuena you must feel like garbage because you got DFAed for Juan Diaz. Folks, Diaz is not a very good prospect. Fringe MLB player, just like Valbuena. If you ask me I'd rather keep Valbuena on the roster. He is a MUCH better hitter than Diaz, and although Diaz is a better defender he is not that much better thanb Valbuena. Plus Valbuena also brings more versatility and experience. Never thought I would see the day I preferred Valbuena on the roster to another player.

As for Salazar, that is the one I don't get at all. He is very talented and a guy they have always been high on, and I know he was throwing up to 98 MPH this fall....but the guy is still a Single-A experienced pitcher and some time away. He's a guy that I don't think any team would have bothered to roster, and even if they did he wouldn't have stuck on a big league roster all year.

All that said, I am not too worried about losing anyone in Rule 5. Even if the Indians do lose a guy or two, I don't expect any of them to stick.

Actions also speak louder than words. The fact the Indians rostered Salazar over guys like Stowell and Bryson shows that Salazar has either been a grossly undervalued prospect, or that Stowell and Bryson have been overvalued. I'm in no way concerned about losing Stowell, though Bryson I think has a chance to stick with someone, though still a long shot.

Just one quick take on Salazar if he is showing command and power, he could be taken. Soria was taken with less information and at the same level just because he had command and power. Not saying he is Soria but when the rule 5 happened neither was soria. I think Byrson and Stowell could be taken its 50K to take a risk on BO arms, not sure if they can stick as few do but I still think very good chance both get taken, and I think Byrson could easily end up back in Mil

Agree Bryson could be a guy a team like MIL snatches up. They are familiar with him and would be a low cost gamble for a talented arm. Of the two he's the one I think is picked and would have the best shot at lasting.

I can see the logic in rostering Diaz to an extent. He was a guy I thought might end up being taken if he wasn't rostered. Having a good defensive SS is important to teams, and Diaz is that by all accounts. I imagine that a lot of teams are going to look to copy the Rays' defensive-minded model, because getting defensive value is really cost-efficient. So I can see the argument that Diaz was probably the most likely to be taken, and I think he has some value to the Indians (though I admit I was surprised by the move).

I wouldn't be surprised if the Indians ended up calling him up at some point either this year or next in case of an injury to ACab, because this team could really a SS with range. That's why I'm a fan of this... Valbuena (in addition to being awful with the bat), was a terrible defensive infielder on a team that has a lot of ground ball pitchers. I wouldn't be surprised if they give Diaz a go if Kipnis is hurt by moving over ACab to 2B either. To me, he's a lot like Carrera. He's a bench guy you'd rather not have to start, but if he ends up having to because of injuries... at least you're improving the team in one aspect (defense). With Valbuena, you just get worse in every aspect of the game.

Stowell and Bryson are interesting targets for the Rule V now, but I agree that Stowell is unlikely to be taken given last year. I'd also say that I can see a team taking a flyer on Espino given his stats last year (4.76 K/BB is very nice), but I mostly doubt that. I'm not sure on the history of catchers being taken in the Rule V, but if there's a spot out there for one I'd imagine Roberto Perez might get some consideration given his defense.

The Diaz move makes a little sense as the Indians were lacking a defensively capable shortstop on the roster. As a hitter though, I think he will struggle to hit .220 at the big league level. Valbuena might be the better all around player, but with Donald and Phelps around he was a bit redundant.

The rostering of Salazar is really a head scratcher though. I am not sure he was on the radar, and with all of the pitching depth in the upper minors, it is confusing as to why they would roster an A ball pitcher. It isn't just Stowell and Bryson that were more deserving, but what about guys like Adams, McFarland, Burns and Lee?

Well, I am glad I waited a day to post because I thought I would too negative about the 40 but that doesn't seem to be the case. I think we can all agree that Barnes warranted protection. The other two may be more telling about the condition of the organization rather than protecting the best players IMO. Protecting Diaz means that the Indians have decided that Valbuena, Phelps and Donald will not cut it as a regular SS in case Cabrera goes down for an extended time or the young SS prospects will be ready for the MLs in two years. Although I hoped Donald could fill that opening, the Indians just don't seem to have the same hope. I do like Diaz' defense better than the others but I think his hitting mechanics are questionable and inconsistent.

Salazar really shocks. IF the Indians felt an injured A+ player warranted protection, why would they protect Salazar over Alex Perez? Not that Salazar is dogmeat but Perez is a far better prospect IMO unless his rehab has stumbled. I cannot see the point in protecting Salazar over McFarland but they must have some reason. I can see why they might be disenchanted with Stowell and Bryson but Perez and McFarland have me scratching my head.

I really do not give a crap about the 40 since it involves marginal prospects for the most part but I think using it as a tool to clean out those prospects at AAA/AA that aren't viewed as necessary is good policy. But it makes me think that DLC will be the cut if Sizemore signs this weekend. Then again, I haven't been close to the mark yet but hope springs eternal.

Tony alluded to this in his piece on Sizemore at STO, the Tribe could be making the Sizemore move to get it done and to be able to move on. I just don't think CA will sit still with the resigning of Sizemore. While a cpl of the moves are obviously perplexing the Tribe could still make a few moves that clears some 40 man spots through trade. I'm not sure about 40 man rules but I believe once the 40 is set players can only be added by signings or trades acq. no one already in the Tribe org. can be added but they could be traded and added by another team until after the rule 5 draft. I'm not saying that will happen, the reality is the Tribe could do a 2 for 1, 3 for 1 type deal to add a bat to the lineup.

indianinkslinger wrote:Well, I am glad I waited a day to post because I thought I would too negative about the 40 but that doesn't seem to be the case. I think we can all agree that Barnes warranted protection. The other two may be more telling about the condition of the organization rather than protecting the best players IMO. Protecting Diaz means that the Indians have decided that Valbuena, Phelps and Donald will not cut it as a regular SS in case Cabrera goes down for an extended time or the young SS prospects will be ready for the MLs in two years. Although I hoped Donald could fill that opening, the Indians just don't seem to have the same hope. I do like Diaz' defense better than the others but I think his hitting mechanics are questionable and inconsistent.

Think you hit the nail on the head here with Diaz's defense at SS and the lack of defense there from the others. donald looks 'ok' at times there, but think the Tribe realizes he's a better fit at 3B due to lack of range, or even the OF. Phelps and Valbuena made valiant efforts to play SS but it's quite clear (at least to me) that neither can really play there in the bigs. Basically you have three guys that are 2B/3B types, makes sense to me to move on from one (the one with the fewest options/least upside) and bring in a SS.

Seems like a unanimous decision on Salazar. Not much more to say there, major shocker.

Thing that gets me the most is that Grady is reportedly close to being signed. so...who goes for him then? Do you move a guy like De La Cruz or Weglarz? Not rosterign Salazar would have been the easy solution to me.

Hermie13 wrote:Seems like a unanimous decision on Salazar. Not much more to say there, major shocker.

Thing that gets me the most is that Grady is reportedly close to being signed. so...who goes for him then? Do you move a guy like De La Cruz or Weglarz? Not rosterign Salazar would have been the easy solution to me.

That's the thing. If they have to DFA someone to add Sizemore, then the two guys up for DFA are Weglarz or De La Cruz....and at this point I'd rather keep either around before I add Salazar (or Diaz). And they added Salazar the same time they were working with Sizemore's agent to bring him back, so even though they knew they were bringing Sizemore back they still rostered Salazar/Diaz.

Makes me think something else is happening, or they quite simply do in fact DFA one of De La/Wegz.

Edible14 wrote:I can see the logic in rostering Diaz to an extent. He was a guy I thought might end up being taken if he wasn't rostered. Having a good defensive SS is important to teams, and Diaz is that by all accounts. I imagine that a lot of teams are going to look to copy the Rays' defensive-minded model, because getting defensive value is really cost-efficient. So I can see the argument that Diaz was probably the most likely to be taken, and I think he has some value to the Indians (though I admit I was surprised by the move).

I wouldn't be surprised if the Indians ended up calling him up at some point either this year or next in case of an injury to ACab, because this team could really a SS with range....

You guys are going way overboard with Diaz's defensive abilities. Good defender? Yes. Is he an elite defender? No way. If you were to give him a letter grade he is a "B" defender at best. Considering his shaky bat and lack of speed/athleticism....he's a dime a dozen infielder. He's a ML bit player at best - if he even makes it. If Juan Diaz is ever playing meaningful time for the Indians, or really time at all, we are in trouble. An automatic out who is just an ordinary ML shortstop.

Edible14 wrote:I can see the logic in rostering Diaz to an extent. He was a guy I thought might end up being taken if he wasn't rostered. Having a good defensive SS is important to teams, and Diaz is that by all accounts. I imagine that a lot of teams are going to look to copy the Rays' defensive-minded model, because getting defensive value is really cost-efficient. So I can see the argument that Diaz was probably the most likely to be taken, and I think he has some value to the Indians (though I admit I was surprised by the move).

I wouldn't be surprised if the Indians ended up calling him up at some point either this year or next in case of an injury to ACab, because this team could really a SS with range....

You guys are going way overboard with Diaz's defensive abilities. Good defender? Yes. Is he an elite defender? No way. If you were to give him a letter grade he is a "B" defender at best. Considering his shaky bat and lack of speed/athleticism....he's a dime a dozen infielder. He's a ML bit player at best - if he even makes it. If Juan Diaz is ever playing meaningful time for the Indians, or really time at all, we are in trouble. An automatic out who is just an ordinary ML shortstop.

I absolutely agree with your assessment of Diaz but when you compare him to the other internal options, a B defender looks good by comparison. I do not agree with it either but they didn't ask. I do not believe the Indians can count on any of their young quality SSs, some of whom may be elite defenders, to be ready to replace AsCab in two years. I believe we will lose McFarland who is highly thought of by the Pads from local reports if he is not picked up first by someone else. Easy to stash as a long reliever IMO.

Edible14 wrote:I can see the logic in rostering Diaz to an extent. He was a guy I thought might end up being taken if he wasn't rostered. Having a good defensive SS is important to teams, and Diaz is that by all accounts. I imagine that a lot of teams are going to look to copy the Rays' defensive-minded model, because getting defensive value is really cost-efficient. So I can see the argument that Diaz was probably the most likely to be taken, and I think he has some value to the Indians (though I admit I was surprised by the move).

I wouldn't be surprised if the Indians ended up calling him up at some point either this year or next in case of an injury to ACab, because this team could really a SS with range....

You guys are going way overboard with Diaz's defensive abilities. Good defender? Yes. Is he an elite defender? No way. If you were to give him a letter grade he is a "B" defender at best. Considering his shaky bat and lack of speed/athleticism....he's a dime a dozen infielder. He's a ML bit player at best - if he even makes it. If Juan Diaz is ever playing meaningful time for the Indians, or really time at all, we are in trouble. An automatic out who is just an ordinary ML shortstop.

I absolutely agree with your assessment of Diaz but when you compare him to the other internal options, a B defender looks good by comparison. I do not agree with it either but they didn't ask. I do not believe the Indians can count on any of their young quality SSs, some of whom may be elite defenders, to be ready to replace AsCab in two years. I believe we will lose McFarland who is highly thought of by the Pads from local reports if he is not picked up first by someone else. Easy to stash as a long reliever IMO.

Agree completely here. A "B" defensive SS is a big improvement over Phelps, Donald, and Valbuena as backups there defensively.

Also agree on McFarland. Think he could be taken and kept as that 7th guy in the pen. didn't pitch that well in the AFL but wasn't terrible either. Not overly concerned about losing him, but think he's got one of the best shots at sticking with another club.

Yes.. something may be in the works.. Chris Antonetti has painted himself into a 40 man roster corner. While there are no restrictions on the amount of time a player has to remain once they're rostered, The Indians know that a guy who is made available for the Rule V Draft has to remain on the ML 25 man roster for the season. In the last couple of years, the total number of players sticking with the club that drafted them is so low, it's almost not worth the claiming fee. Some might even consider the cost in anxiety to be greater than any benefit to a club acquiring a player..

But, there's always that exception/diamond in the rough that makes this "exercise" what it is: Johan Santana, Joaquin Soria, Josh Hamilton.. etc.. So, like every other means to an end, it behooves CA to explore the listing of players that will be Rule V Eligible. The Indians have about four or five spots that would be "the next" DFA candidate: Juan Diaz, Danny Salazar, Kelvin de la Cruz, Thomas Neal and Corey Kluber's 40 man roster spots are clearly at risk for both the Grady Sizemore addition that may not be announced until after the Winter Meetings.. or CA finds the next diamond in the rough, however unlikely that is...

For the Indians Rule V Eligibles.. it would be a pretty fair guess that several ML clubs may attempt to find a way to stash a player like Nick Weglarz on the ML DL. As a ML DL'er he'll get a very nice raise in pay and a year's service if the acquiring club goes that way.. Otherwise.. no one left unprotected appears to be in danger of being the next Johan...

I really am surprised by the rule 5 additions to the 40 but the Tribe brass knows more about this team that we do so we have to keep believing. In any event, either Salazar has come back with an absolute vengeance after TJ or they just believe he is the best prospect in our system above the other prospects. McFarland has performed well the past couple years and has looked like one of the better starters in the AFL this year. I am quite surprised that Bryson was left off as well. I can see why Stowell was unprotected with his highly erratic last two seasons. However, I would have stashed Bryson and McFarland instead of Diaz and Salazar but what do I know.

Hope this is again another uneventful rule 5 for the Tribe that gets talked about much more than it is worth.

If a FA is signed soon, I would guestimate that Kluber would likely be the first one off the 40.

Lastly, I understand the Tribe leaving off A. Perez and Araujo but they better pray that they do not lose one of those two guys as they are both likely going to be fantastic major league players. I just can't see how either one is ready for the pros yet but stranger things have happened.

I am OK with the Grady signing. I hope he reaches all the incentives because if he does then it will mean a good season. Now I still think the Indians need 2 more acquisitions.

1. OF - hits RH and can play at the minimum both corners.2. 1B - this has to be the impact player.

Now if they sign a combo OF/1B then I am OK with that as a single signing but this guy must be a RH power hitter. I'm not high on Kotchman at all as I'm not sure he adds a lot to the team offensively. I'm luke warm on Pena as he's a lefty and really isn't the O force that his contract will demand.

GhostofTedCox wrote:It's Monday, and still no official word on the Sizemore signing. Maybe that doesn't mean anything, but it might mean:

- Another club has decided to up the stakes on Sizemore. Remember, the story on the potential signing was leaked by his agent; not the Indians.

- Antonetti realizes there might be a better place to put the money, even incentive money, than Sizemore. You cannot go into the season with Sizemore penciled in as a regular.

While it wouldn't be the first time the City of Cleveland's fans have had their hearts ripped out by a player and his agent promising/intimating their undying love and devotion to Cleveland, only to see that player skip town for greener or longer pastures. It seems doubtful that this delay can be anything more than a timing issue w/r to roster management as Dain has indicated..

The Rule V Draft is pretty much a lot of mixing and matching of rosters and players in an effort to minimize it's importance. The initial concept behind the draft was to allow a player who was hopelessly trapped in an organization a means to ply his trade with another club. The net results have shown this is not the case. The Rule V draft is pretty much a "last resort" for most of the players involved. If a player is acquired via Rule V, in over 3/4ths of the time, that player is out of baseball withing the next three years. That said, here are the Rule V drafts for the last couple of years:

2010 Rule V Draft Results: Last year, there were 19 players chosen in the Rule V draft, major league phase. Of those 19, all but 6 were returned to the acquiring team. An additional 2 players were acquired via trade allowing the player to be sent to the minors for further seasoning.

2009 Rule V Draft Results: 17 players were chosen in the Rule V draft, major league phase. Of those, 3 were retained by the drafting club. 2 Additional players were kept by the acquiring team after the team declined to reclaim the player. 2 more were sent to the minors after a trade had been worked out.

Of the prospects that are Rule V eligible for the Indians...it's doubtful anyone will be gone permanently.

toledobuck wrote:I really am surprised by the rule 5 additions to the 40 but the Tribe brass knows more about this team that we do so we have to keep believing. In any event, either Salazar has come back with an absolute vengeance after TJ or they just believe he is the best prospect in our system above the other prospects. McFarland has performed well the past couple years and has looked like one of the better starters in the AFL this year. I am quite surprised that Bryson was left off as well. I can see why Stowell was unprotected with his highly erratic last two seasons. However, I would have stashed Bryson and McFarland instead of Diaz and Salazar but what do I know.

Hope this is again another uneventful rule 5 for the Tribe that gets talked about much more than it is worth.

If a FA is signed soon, I would guestimate that Kluber would likely be the first one off the 40.

Lastly, I understand the Tribe leaving off A. Perez and Araujo but they better pray that they do not lose one of those two guys as they are both likely going to be fantastic major league players. I just can't see how either one is ready for the pros yet but stranger things have happened.

Im a little concerned over losing Araujo too. Although he doesn't have much experience above rookie ball, 6'6" hard throwing lefties do not exactly grow on trees. A team like the Astros whose season is pretty much over before it starts would be smart to draft him and try to stash him in the back of the bullpen. I hope this doesn't happen, but it is not out of the realm of possibility.

25 man roster spots are soooo precious that stashing a guy who will not be able to contribute happens a lot less than you'd think.. It's why the Rule V draft is soooo under used... too much risk for too little return..

That said, it would be a sad day for the Indians if Araujo was to be selected...

In summary, the basis of the argument for trading CP is the Indians have depth in the form of a younger cheaper and potentially more effective RP (based on "stats" and other 'intangibles) already on the roster that can fill the gap in the event someone, anyone has to have Chris Perez in their pen..

Okay.. fair enough and for the most part, agreeable in concept.. but.. here are a few questions:

-Would the Indians make the same trade if the asking club wanted Vinnie instead of CP?

-Would Vinnie be a more valuable trade chip in that case? (i.e. would he net a better/more valuable return)

-Hypothetical (goes to the subject of depth).. CP is traded and everyone is THRILLED with the RH OF/1B/C that is returned. Then, Vinnie becomes the ugly version of Fausto closing in 2006 or is injured. Games the Indians appear to have in the bag with an effective Vinnie at the back of the pen become IFFY.. who do the Indians turn to then?

In summary, the basis of the argument for trading CP is the Indians have depth in the form of a younger cheaper and potentially more effective RP (based on "stats" and other 'intangibles) already on the roster that can fill the gap in the event someone, anyone has to have Chris Perez in their pen..

Okay.. fair enough and for the most part, agreeable in concept.. but.. here are a few questions:

-Would the Indians make the same trade if the asking club wanted Vinnie instead of CP?

-Would Vinnie be a more valuable trade chip in that case? (i.e. would he net a better/more valuable return)

-Hypothetical (goes to the subject of depth).. CP is traded and everyone is THRILLED with the RH OF/1B/C that is returned. Then, Vinnie becomes the ugly version of Fausto closing in 2006 or is injured. Games the Indians appear to have in the bag with an effective Vinnie at the back of the pen become IFFY.. who do the Indians turn to then?

thanks for reading...comments?

I am not sure Pestano would return as much in a trade, as he doesn't have as much of a track record as Perez. If Perez were traded and Pestano flopped there are still other options. Hagadone could be an option. Im not sure if he is ready for that role yet, but he could be in the near future. Rafael Perez and Joe Smith are solid relievers and would not embarrass themselves too much. Neither would be ideal though as they both are specialist type pitchers. They could decide to go with a closer by committee. Rondon could eventually be an option if they decide they no longer want him to start. Same with Knapp.

ClevelandBlues wrote:I am not sure Pestano would return as much in a trade, as he doesn't have as much of a track record as Perez. If Perez were traded and Pestano flopped there are still other options. Hagadone could be an option. Im not sure if he is ready for that role yet, but he could be in the near future. Rafael Perez and Joe Smith are solid relievers and would not embarrass themselves too much. Neither would be ideal though as they both are specialist type pitchers. They could decide to go with a closer by committee. Rondon could eventually be an option if they decide they no longer want him to start. Same with Knapp.

From the intel I have gathered, Pestano would return more in a trade. Viewed higher as a late inning reliever than Chris Perez. Two more years of control, much cheaper, and probably more effective as a closer. So, yes, the Indians likely would get more for Pestano.

But it would be foolish to deal him. You then leave Perez, a VERY ordinary closer, as your only option. All the signs point to him having a lot of struggles next year as the numbers will catch up and the save rate will decrease. The Indians need to seriously consider trading Perez if the opportunity arises where a good player comes in return. I'd be fine with bringing Perez back, but I still think and have felt since the middle of last season that Pestano should be closing out games.

In the event Pestano would get hurt, then the Indians would have to look at other options. At this time last year did anyone think Pestano would be a legit closer candidate? No. So, by midseason next year some of their young, inexperienced arms like Putnam, Judy, Hagadone, or Lee may step up and be that backup closer.